More thoughts on the 9mm takeover
Since mention of the takeover, I’ve been thinking about why. Obviously, it’s because ammo tech has advanced but why so much for the 9mm? My guess is due to the expiration of the assault weapons ban. Prior to 1994, magazines that held more than 10 rounds were at a premium. And then post 2004, that wasn’t an issue. During that decade, if you bought a carry gun, you may as well get a .45. It’s going to be the same size and only hold ten rounds. Ten bigger rounds. And people did that. Heck, I did.
Well, with more 11+ 9mm magazines that are more affordable, the market responded.
February 12th, 2014 at 12:23 am
that’s exactly the logic i used when buying my .45 in one of the hostile states.
February 12th, 2014 at 1:13 am
Cost is a big issue too. Back in the day when you could get a box of .45 for $5, the premium was doable. These days, you’re talking a $10+ difference. That really adds up. More than it used to.
February 12th, 2014 at 1:55 am
That’s because most pistol owners will never willing run towards the sounds of battle, they just want an appliance, not the most effective weapon. That’s why the Honda accord is the best selling car, not the G37 which is far far superior but would you buy one for your wife..?
February 12th, 2014 at 7:12 am
Third look at .38 Spl ++P++?
February 12th, 2014 at 9:54 am
Comatus, you mean that in an airweight revolver?
That is the .38 Special “Hand Breaker” 😛
February 12th, 2014 at 11:03 am
I read that the .38 Special is the most popular pistol cartridge in the world (they wouldn’t put it on the internet if it weren’t true). The 9mm has to be a close second. Sure, you can nitpick both, but the bottom line is that they’re basically good cartridges.
February 12th, 2014 at 11:06 am
+P 158gr LSWC in a stainless K-frame 2″ snubbie. No complaints.
February 12th, 2014 at 11:55 am
If there’s been that much improvement in 9mm performance, why hasn’t any of it spilled over to .45? One would think that improved powders and bullet designs would be effective across both the platforms.
February 12th, 2014 at 12:00 pm
It’s the single digit. A nine? What is that compared to a forty or a forty-five. Even compared to a three eighty or a twenty-two. Look at the five-seven. That’s a scary gun. But a nine? Come on. they should have made it an eight-nine, then they’d have something massive.
February 12th, 2014 at 6:12 pm
Jefferson101 — I agree. However, the difference in actually stopping the target between the 9mm version of this round and the .45ACP version of this round will still be tiny.
Even when the .45ACP retains a slight advantage over the 9mm with a similar modern JHP, the reduced recoil and extra round count probably more than compensates, because “Shoot him again!” is the fastest and esiest way to increase total wound channel volume, maximizing the odds of a timely stop. As will placing the shots more accurately because you A. can afford to shoot more in practice, and B. shoot the lower recoiling round better.
And I say this as a die hard fan of the 1911 and the .45ACP round. “More bullets, faster” when the performance difference is measured in single digit percentiles is probably the more rational bet.
Different story with ball ammo. The plural of “anecdote” may not be “data”, but there is enough there in this case to call it a rough approximation of data. (The difference between the average frontal area and wound channels of a 9x19mm FMJ and a .45ACP FMJ, ESPECIALLY when only considering the thickness of the human body, is much greater than the difference between the average frontal area and wound channels of a modern 9x19mm JHP and a modern .45ACP JHP.)
February 12th, 2014 at 7:02 pm
Really the .45ACP/9mm performance differential was overblown to begin with. Police forces all over the US somehow managed to get by with the .38 Special for decades before transitioning to semi-autos, and 9mm is practically identical to .38 Special. Yes, you can fit 158gr bullets into .38 Special because it’s a longer cartridge, but at identical bullet weights the 9mm has higher velocity, and the bullet diameters are identical for all practical purposes.
The biggest stink was raised in the military when they switched from the 1911 to the Beretta 92. Ball ammo DOES have a significant performance delta between 9mm and .45ACP, and the military is forced to use ball ammo by international treaties. So that argument applies there, but it does not apply to carry by civilians where JHP’s are common.
All that being said, I agree with Uncle’s point that the AWB’s 10-round limit probably increased the popularity of .45ACP among civilians.
I’m not saying there has not been improvement in bullet design in the last 10 years, but I think it is being over-stated and used as a convenient rationalization by people who won’t admit that they were suckered into believing that .45 was so much better based on un-applicable data from military sources.
February 12th, 2014 at 8:31 pm
I think that people just become enamored with first one thing, then tire of it, and become enamored with the other. Only a matter of time before 45acp will come roaring back. I have a High Power and a Gold Cup, so I’m covered either way, lol.
February 12th, 2014 at 11:57 pm
Any evidence someone survived 7 or more rounds from a .45? Not that I’ve ever heard of. Let me know though.
February 13th, 2014 at 12:58 pm
I started shooting back in 2003, before the AWB expired and took magazine limits with it. I remember buying a 1911 in .45 as my first gun (maybe not the best choice, but not a bad one), and that was a reason why- if it’s between 10 rounds of 9mm or .40 and 7-8 rounds of .45, I may as well drill the holes as big as I can. Ammo premium for .45 wasn’t insignificant, but it was $5 for 50 rounds of 9mm or $10 for the same amount of .45. So it wasn’t too bad.
Nowadays the price and capacity difference is much larger. As much as I love the .45 cartridge, 9mm starts looking more attractive.
February 13th, 2014 at 11:14 pm
@ Hardcorps:
I have heard the story about the military guy and wife who got jumped by a couple BG’s in a parking structure. He put at least 5 rnds center mass in the first one, engaged the second, and when he turned around, he found the first one had stabbed the wife. IIRC, it was a 1911 with ball ammo. Major city here in the US, but I no longer remember any more details.
It was among the stories about the lack of stopping power of ball ammo against committed opponents here in the US, as opposed to war stories of soldiers in battle. The two should not be looked at as comparable, for a number of reasons.
February 13th, 2014 at 11:19 pm
The other story was the two guys in a boarding house? who argued. One grabbed a 1911 and emptied it into the chest of the smaller guy. His opponent then returned fire with a .25acp, IIRC. Guy shooting the .45 died.
February 17th, 2014 at 5:59 pm
I have a few added thoughts to share on this topic
1)There is a very large fragment of the U.S. population which still lives under magazine capacity restrictions due to state laws, regardless of the sunset of the Fed 1994 ban.
2)New Jersey notoriously restricts hollow point bullets, which mostly hurts the performance of over-penetrating calibers like the 9mm Luger.
3)The performance of 9mm hollowpoint seems more sensitive to changes in barrel length than .40 or .45 ammunition (by my reading of the data from ballisticsbytheinch.com).
4)I do have to wonder if exploiting the greater capacity of a 9mm handgun might backfire when it comes to justifying a self-defense shooting. I imagine it is easier to defend the firing 4 shots from a 10 shot weapon compared to 8 shots from a 20 shot weapon.
5)Arbitrary selection of one caliber as best in most cases seems senseless to me. All handgun cartridges fired from virtually any handgun suitable for concealed carry are weak since handgun cartridges are inherently designed to fit a small gun. So caliber size for a particular handgun should be chosen on the basis of whatever fits best that specifically sized handgun, regardless of a lower final round count or even if that means shooting a caliber less powerful than 9mm. (IOW the Glock 42 isn’t stupid)